Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:57:04 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP Message-ID: <D889FFD5-6832-43B9-A6BA-93111C619F35@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1357660252.29936.YahooMailClassic@web121603.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1357660252.29936.YahooMailClassic@web121603.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Barney Cordoba wrote: > --- On Mon, 1/7/13, Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> = wrote: >=20 >> From: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> >> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP >> To: "Barney Cordoba" <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> >> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org >> Date: Monday, January 7, 2013, 10:56 PM >> Hi, >>=20 >> On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:25:58 -0800 (PST) >> Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >>=20 >>> I have a situation where I have to run 9.1 on an old >> single core box. >>> Does anyone have a handle on whether it's better to >> build a non SMP >>> kernel or to just use a standard SMP build with just >> the one core? >>> Thanks. >>=20 >> I ran a single CPU version of FreeBSD until my last single >> CPU got hit >> by a lightning last April or May without any problems. >>=20 >> I never saw a reason to include the overhead of SMP for this >> kind of >> machine and I also never ran into problems with this. >=20 > Another "ass"umption based on logic rather than empirical evidence. It isn't really an offhanded assumption because there _is_ = additional overhead added into the kernel structures to make things work = SMP with locking :). Whether or not it's measurable for you and your = applications, I have no idea. HTH, -Garrett=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D889FFD5-6832-43B9-A6BA-93111C619F35>